IN OUR OPINION

Editorial: Red-light cameras

Published: Monday, February 24, 2014 at 6:30 a.m.

Last Modified: Saturday, February 22, 2014 at 11:49 p.m.

A recent analysis of Florida's red-light-camera programs does little to clear the air on this controversial subject. But it points out other important steps the state should take to improve traffic safety.

The analysis was done by the Legislature's Office of Program Policy Analysis & Government Accountability. The office issued a memorandum on five questions posed in regard to red-light cameras, which were authorized by lawmakers in 2010.

Unfortunately, the analysis did not directly focus on a key question: Do these automated cameras curb dangerous red-light running? We think it's likely they do — in the right places — but data is incomplete.

Meanwhile, opponents, like many residents of Dunnellon who experienced the wrath of the devices before they were removed, contend that the cameras are meant to increase government revenue rather than to save lives. Some lawmakers are trying to de-authorize the devices altogether, shrink the fines or limit the way communities can use the revenue.

We urge legislators to modify the rules to ensure fairness and justice and let the cameras prove their worth — but don't stop there.

When it comes to intersections — where 40 percent of all reported crashes take place — red-light running is one of several causes of serious injury. We see it every day here in Ocala/Marion County. More safety measures are needed, including these:

* Enforce standardized timing for yellow lights. Standardization — based on engineering formulas that factor in an intersection's size, speed limit and such — results in more predictability and better compliance with signals.

The analysis did not cover all red-light cameras — just those involving 230 intersections on state roads, where consistent data was more readily available. In one very good piece of news, those data indicated that a whopping 49 percent drop in fatal crashes had occurred among the camera-equipped intersections in the study. It's a compelling statistic.

However, among the same group of intersections, data showed only a 1 percent decline in injury crashes — in part because of an increase in “rear-end, angle and total crashes.”

The office noted limitations in the data. The data don't say whether the 230 camera intersections studied had undergone other safety improvements. Nor is the report clear on what role red-light running — or other risk factors — played in the crashes. Yet law enforcement agencies around Florida, including Dunnellon, feel that the cameras — and fines for violations — have nudged motorists to drive more safely. As more communities consider adding red-light cameras, it is fair to ask that they base the decisions on solid safety reasons, backed up with better data reporting.

Meanwhile, state lawmakers should look beyond the cameras to other safety enhancements, such as intersection upgrades and grants for traffic enforcement. Florida lawmakers should be working toward a common goal: safety for all — motorists, pedestrians and cyclists — who use our busy roadways.

<p>A recent analysis of Florida's red-light-camera programs does little to clear the air on this controversial subject. But it points out other important steps the state should take to improve traffic safety.</p><p>The analysis was done by the Legislature's Office of Program Policy Analysis & Government Accountability. The office issued a memorandum on five questions posed in regard to red-light cameras, which were authorized by lawmakers in 2010.</p><p>Unfortunately, the analysis did not directly focus on a key question: Do these automated cameras curb dangerous red-light running? We think it's likely they do — in the right places — but data is incomplete.</p><p>Meanwhile, opponents, like many residents of Dunnellon who experienced the wrath of the devices before they were removed, contend that the cameras are meant to increase government revenue rather than to save lives. Some lawmakers are trying to de-authorize the devices altogether, shrink the fines or limit the way communities can use the revenue.</p><p>We urge legislators to modify the rules to ensure fairness and justice and let the cameras prove their worth — but don't stop there.</p><p>When it comes to intersections — where 40 percent of all reported crashes take place — red-light running is one of several causes of serious injury. We see it every day here in Ocala/Marion County. More safety measures are needed, including these:</p><p>* Enforce standardized timing for yellow lights. Standardization — based on engineering formulas that factor in an intersection's size, speed limit and such — results in more predictability and better compliance with signals.</p><p>* Enhance visibility, so drivers can better see pedestrians, cyclists, oncoming motorcyclists, signals and signs.</p><p>* Curtail speeding in the approaches to intersections.</p><p>* Protect vulnerable pedestrians with well-designed crosswalks and “refuges.”</p><p>Such adjustments can reduce fatalities at intersections.</p><p>The analysis did not cover all red-light cameras — just those involving 230 intersections on state roads, where consistent data was more readily available. In one very good piece of news, those data indicated that a whopping 49 percent drop in fatal crashes had occurred among the camera-equipped intersections in the study. It's a compelling statistic.</p><p>However, among the same group of intersections, data showed only a 1 percent decline in injury crashes — in part because of an increase in “rear-end, angle and total crashes.”</p><p>The office noted limitations in the data. The data don't say whether the 230 camera intersections studied had undergone other safety improvements. Nor is the report clear on what role red-light running — or other risk factors — played in the crashes. Yet law enforcement agencies around Florida, including Dunnellon, feel that the cameras — and fines for violations — have nudged motorists to drive more safely. As more communities consider adding red-light cameras, it is fair to ask that they base the decisions on solid safety reasons, backed up with better data reporting.</p><p>Meanwhile, state lawmakers should look beyond the cameras to other safety enhancements, such as intersection upgrades and grants for traffic enforcement. Florida lawmakers should be working toward a common goal: safety for all — motorists, pedestrians and cyclists — who use our busy roadways.</p>